• books@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’ll agree that is A problem, but not the only problem.

    • Nimbyism
    • Building laws
    • licensing laws
    • zoning

    Those things also add to the exorbitant cost of housing. It’s not investors who are causing houses to cost 300 a square foot in my city, it’s lack of buildable land, contractor availability, licensing, residential zoning laws. All those things equal cost… some of those things could be fixed with less regulation.

      • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well, it’s both, but I agree with you that rich fucks and corpos running rentals and airbnb’s is a much more prescient and addressable issue.

    • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean, food can be made cheaper with less regulation too, that doesn’t mean that’s the right answer or even a good answer. Most of that stuff you mentioned has been in place for a long time. The more recent blowup in cost isn’t directly related.

      • books@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        You do realize it’s possible that it’s more than one thing that is contributing to the cost of housing, right? … and not just landlords, despite what lemmy keeps telling everyone.

        • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You understand that the better version of your argument is better regulation, not less regulation, right? That’s really the core of my point. Plus, the items you mentioned still have other benefits that need to be weighed against (and lack of contractors isn’t even a regulation, it’s a possible outcome of some other regulation, which is probably the licensing, but that is even closer to the whole FDA argument I made, and let’s be honest, you needed more items for your list).

          Edit: and it being a seller’s market is absolutely caused by demand for purchasing, so in the end it’s still landlords fault. They’re converting too many non-rentals to rentals. They’re buying up houses at high costs because it becomes more affordable with more units, therefore driving pricing. It truly is the biggest influence in purchase price. Regulating that would absolutely have a far better effect than deregulating other areas (which still sounds more like they just need better regulation).

          • books@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I mean in my neck of the woods the issue is less landlords driving up the price as it is influx of California s selling 1000 sqft homes in California for 1 million and being able to pay cash for any affordable house here because we don’t have a supply… again see my other reason for not having supply

            • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I just googled it. It seems to be the mortgage lock-in effect that’s the number one driving factor for lack of homes. Mortgage rates are too high so people aren’t selling. They do mention construction under-building, but it’s not really the main cause. Also in 2021, California passed a law allowing single family homes to become up to 4-family dwellings… oh… this lead to a bunch of companies coming in and paying cash for homes to convert to rental units. And there’s actually been a lot of push to make it easier to build more and further deregulate and that seems to be having none of your expected outcomes… because it’s not really the biggest reason. And again, it has even had some of the opposite due to zoning deregulation.